Heard the one about the jockey who went unpunished after being found guilty of stopping two horses? No? Then you must have missed Thursday's verdict by the British Horseracing Authority, whose disciplinary panel decided that Charlotte Kerton had twice ridden horses to deliberate defeat but thought it best to let her off anyway.

Kerton was one of six defendants in the case. The other five were "warned off", exiled from the sport, for at least three years in each case. George Prodromou, the trainer at the centre of the inquiry, was excluded for eight years, though he will appeal and the others may follow suit.

But the panel took a much more lenient view of Kerton's offence, declaring only that the BHA should refuse to consider any application from her for a jockey's licence in the next six years. No exclusion order was made, no fine levied. The panel forebore even to send any harsh language in her direction.

Kerton was never very talented or prolific. Her best year was 2009, when she had two winners from 47 rides. She has not ridden in Britain since October of the following year and all but three of her rides in 2010 came from Prodromou.

The sport, it seems, gave up on her a long time ago and it is therefore no punishment at all to refuse her a British licence. She has in the past been able to get rides in Bahrain and Qatar and may continue to do so. Thursday's verdict will not prevent her from riding anywhere abroad.

How can we justify this blase approach to a rider judged to have committed the act that, for most followers of the sport, is most heinous and least forgivable? In relation to her ride on Timeteam at Lingfield in January 2010, the panel concluded that "the horse's head was intentionally turned to the right by Ms Kerton to such an extent that the gelding could not start on even terms with the other runners".

Of her ride on Trip Switch, also at Lingfield that same month, the panel said she allowed the horse to sit "in last place without making any effort to close on the other runners until the two furlong pole. She then made a weak appearance of trying to improve her position".

The panel was satisfied that Kerton agreed to ride the horses in this way at Prodromou's insistence, in exchange for further rides from him. It found no evidence that she had been given any purely financial reward.

It should have imposed a harsher penalty in any case. The entry point for just one offence of this kind is an eight-year exclusion order, which would be reciprocated by other ruling bodies around the world. It is bizarre that Kerton has, in effect, been allowed to walk away unscathed after being found to have stopped two horses. If she chose, she could take a job in any racing yard tomorrow, with influence over any number of young entrants to the sport.

Racing has not been brave or assertive in dealing with those suspected of corrupt behaviour, as was seen in the case of Fergal Lynch. He did a deal with the BHA in 2009 by which he admitted stopping a horse, in exchange for a lenient penalty that allowed him to ride in other countries. He is now in the process of trying to get his British licence back.

No good can come of allowing people to remain in the sport in these circumstances. Riding a horse to intended defeat should be completely beyond the pale and, whatever the extenuating circumstances, riders found guilty of same should be banished forever.